Measures of research productivity and quality are key components of academic life, and a
successful academic career is heavily dependent on meeting quantified performance …

Since 2005, and with generous support from the AW Mellon Foundation, The Future of
Scholarly Communication Project at UC Berkeley's Center for Studies in Higher Education …

Author-based metrics (ABMs) and journal-based metrics (JBMs), as well as citations, are the
dominant currency of intellectual recognition in academia. These metrics and citations …

We critically assess a common approach to scholarly impact that relies almost exclusively on
a single stakeholder (ie, other academics). We argue that this approach is narrow and …

Executive Summary In 2004 the Executive Council of the Modern Language Association of
America created a task force to examine current standards and emerging trends in …

The proliferation of team-authored academic work has led to the proliferation of two kinds of
authorship misconduct: ghost authorship, in which contributors are not listed as authors and …

In this essay we explore parallels in the birth, evolution and final 'banning'of journal impact
factors (IFs) and university rankings (URs). IFs and what has become popularized as global …

Literature occasionally depicts undesirable consequences of research evaluation, most
importantly overprovision of low-quality research. Such inadvertent outcomes are explained …

Many factors determine the definition of scholarship at any given time, including the
discipline, the priorities of the institution and academic unit, and the interests of the …

Ratings and rankings are omnipresent and influential in contemporary society. Individuals
and organizations strategically respond to incentives set by rating systems. We use …